The Builsa South Member of Parliament (MP) has backed the decision by the Environment Ministry to retrieve some ¢6.3 million from local IT company, rLG Communications Limited.

Dr Clement Apaak said the company has to refund to the state the money, which represented the total of 12,733 laptops it could not supply to government in 2010.

The company was contracted and paid in full to provide 103,181 laptops to the state at a cost of 51 million cedis.

CEO of AGAMS Group, Roland Agambire

But the company ended up providing only 90,448 laptops, leaving a balance of 12,733 pieces, the Auditor-General's report for 2015 has said.

The worth of the non-supplied laptops is estimated at ¢6, 366,875.00.

The A-G's report said when rLG Communications was contacted on the matter, it claimed the Ministry had not made the request for the remaining laptops to be produced and distributed.

Environment Minister, Prof. Frimpong Boateng told Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee (PAC) the company had agreed to refund the money.

“We want [an] outright payment… ideally, this amount should be paid with interest," he told the lawmakers.

But the company in letter said it did not owe the state as claimed by the A-G's report.

The company has said it fulfilled it obligations under the contract with the Environment Ministry by supplying 3,000 higher spec laptops to make up for the 12,000 lower spec laptops it failed to supply under the free laptop distribution policy.

Prof. Frimpong Boateng said the 3000 laptops supplied by Rlg still did not meet the required specifications.

Builsa South MP, Dr Clement Apaak

Dr Apaak who served in the past regime as a Presidential staffer has asked the rLG Communications to do the needful by settling its debts with the government.

"I don't know why the company failed to satisfy...[but] we must retrieve all monies belonging to the state," he said.

On his part, Kade MP Kwabena Ohemeng Tenyase has asked the Ministry to dialogue with the company to arrive at a most appropriate payment method.

He said the method agreed upon must be legally binding so that in the event of a breach something could be done about it.